From d6574fabbc889c588cc430106afdf3d7be041521 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: ggserver Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2024 08:01:48 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Add updates up until 2024-09-11 07:55:35 --- .../87/03D687D4FFF86564120A95F4FC9FFB1A.xml | 570 ++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 570 insertions(+) create mode 100644 data/03/D6/87/03D687D4FFF86564120A95F4FC9FFB1A.xml diff --git a/data/03/D6/87/03D687D4FFF86564120A95F4FC9FFB1A.xml b/data/03/D6/87/03D687D4FFF86564120A95F4FC9FFB1A.xml new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..92514c1d19f --- /dev/null +++ b/data/03/D6/87/03D687D4FFF86564120A95F4FC9FFB1A.xml @@ -0,0 +1,570 @@ + + + +Systematics of the Stripetail Darter, Etheostoma kennicotti (Putnam), and the Distinctiveness of the Upper Cumberland Endemic Etheostoma cumberlandicum Jordan and Swain + + + +Author + +Near, Thomas J. + + + +Author + +Simmons, Jeffrey W. + + + +Author + +Strange, Rex M. + + + +Author + +Brandt, Stephanie + + + +Author + +Thomas, Matthew R. + + + +Author + +Harrington, Richard C. + + + +Author + +MacGuigan, Daniel J. + +text + + +Ichthyology & Herpetology + + +2023 + +2023-04-18 + + +111 + + +2 + + +203 +221 + + + + +http://dx.doi.org/10.1643/i2021053 + +journal article +10.1643/i2021053 +2766-1520 + + + + + + + +Etheostoma cumberlandicum +Jordan +and Swain, 1883 + +: + + + +251 + + + + +Moonbow Darter + + + + +urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act: +4BF24D57-46C2-4DA8-9D8C- E9A26D880DC1 + + + +Figure 5A, B +; +Tables 5–11 + + + +Etheostoma cumberlandicum + +: +Jordan +and Swain, 1883: 251 (meristic data and species description); Page and Smith, 1976: 533 (listed as synonym of + +Etheostoma kennicotti + +); Page, 1983: 149 (referenced as a synonym of + +Etheostoma kennicotti + +); Beckham, 1983: 27 (referenced as a synonym of + +Etheostoma kennicotti + +); Braasch and Mayden, 1985: 53 (referenced as a synonym of + +Etheostoma kennicotti + +). + + + +Etheostoma flabellare cumberlandicum + +: +Jordan +and Evermann 1898: 1098 (morphology, geographic distribution, and listed as a subspecies of + +Etheostoma flabellare + +); Ross and Carico, 1963: 12 (listed as a subspecies of + +Etheostoma flabellare + +); Collette and Knapp, 1966: 25 (listed as a subspecies of + +Etheostoma flabellare + +). + + + +Catonotus kennicotti cumberlandicus + +: Shoup and Peyton, 1940: 111 (distribution in Jellico Creek system and listed as a subspecies of + +Etheostoma kennicotti + +). + + + +Etheostoma kennicotti cumberlandicum + +: Page and Smith, 1976: 532 (listed as a subspecies, but it was placed into the synonymy of + +Etheostoma kennicotti + +); Smith, 1979: 288 (referenced as a synonym of + +Etheostoma kennicotti + +); Braasch and Mayden, 1985: 53 (referenced as a synonym of + +Etheostoma kennicotti + +); Burr and Warren, 1986: 304 (referenced as a synonym of + +Etheostoma kennicotti + +); Etnier and Starnes, 1993: 500 (referenced as a synonym of + +Etheostoma kennicotti + +). + + + +Etheostoma kennicotti + +: Carter and Jones, 1969: 13, 67 (presence in Poor Fork of the upper Cumberland River system); Comiskey and Etnier, 1972: 143 (distribution in Big South Fork system); Page and Smith, 1976: tables 3–6, fig. 2 (meristic trait variation and pigmentation); Starnes and Starnes, 1978: 515 (syntopic with + +Chrosomus cumberlandensis + +[Starnes and Starnes] in the upper Cumberland River system); Wolfe et al., 1979 (allozyme variation); Wolfe and Branson, 1979 (LDH isozyme variation); Burr, 1980: 76 (distribution in upper Cumberland River system); Page, 1983: 149, map 80 (geographic distribution and morphological variation); Page and Schemske, 1978 (geographic distribution and body size); O’Bara and Estes, 1984: 10–12 (presence in the Clear Fork system in upper Cumberland River system); Burr and Warren, 1986: 304 (geographic distribution and habitat notes); Etnier and Starnes, 1993: 499–500, range map 227, plate 235b (photograph of nuptial condition male, geographic distribution, diet, and life history notes); Song et al., 1998: tables 1, 2, figs. 1, 3–5 (phylogenetic relationships); Strange, 1998: 101 (distribution in upper Cumberland River system); Porterfield et al., 1999: figs. 2–6 (phylogenetic relationships); Near et al., 2011: table 1, figs. 3, 4 (classification and phylogenetic relationships). + + + + + +Lectotype +.— + +Designated by Collette and Knapp (1966: 25). USNM 36502, +41 mm +standard length (SL), Wolf Creek a tributary of Clear Fork, near Pleasant View, Whitley Co., Kentucky, D. S. +Jordan +, J. Swain, and C. H. Gilbert, +May 1883 +. + + + +Paralectotypes +.— + +Designated by Collette and Knapp (1966: 25). USNM 197992, +4 specimens +, +20–42 mm +SL, same collection information as +lectotype +. + + +Material examined.— +A total of +263 specimens +, +25–62 mm +SL (see Material Examined). + + + + + +Table 10. Counts of left pectoral-fin rays in + +Etheostoma cumberlandicum + +and + +E. kennicotti + +. Abbreviations: +n +, number of specimens; SD, standard deviation. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Number of left pectoral-fin rays
SpeciesDrainage11121314 +n +MeanSD
+ +Etheostoma cumberlandicum + +Upper Cumberland2691691725712.780.57
+Etheostoma kennicotti +Laurel River261188112.200.46
Ohio–Clarks317123212.280.63
Green21172012.250.64
Lower Tennessee1511943117812.170.57
Upper Tennessee119116212012.080.54
+ + + +FIG. 4. Morphological disparity in + +Etheostoma kennicotti +sensu lato + +and + +Etheostoma cumberlandicum + +. (A) Plot of first and second principal component scores of meristic traits in + +Etheostoma kennicotti +sensu lato + +and + +Etheostoma cumberlandicum + +. (B) Mahalanobis distances of PC scores for contrasts of species in the + +Etheostoma kennicotti + +complex. In each comparison, the red and blue lineages on the +cytb +phylogeny are contrasted. A lineage that is a dashed branch is not included in the contrast. The comparison between the upper (U.) Tennessee and lower (L.) Tennessee River is considered an intraspecific contrast. + + + + + +Diagnosis.— +Etheostoma cumberlandicum + +is distinguished from all other species referred to as + +E. kennicotti + +by a modal count of 13 versus 12 rays in the pectoral fin and modally seven caudal bands versus modally nine or ten caudal bands ( +Tables 10 +, 11), 88.3% of specimens of + +E. cumberlandicum + +have eight or fewer caudal bands and 82.7% specimens of + +E. kennicotti + +(s.l.) have nine or more caudal bands. + + + + + +Distribution.— +Etheostoma cumberlandicum + +is distributed in the Roaring Paunch Creek system, a tributary of the Big South Fork and in the Cumberland River system above Cumberland Falls. Collections of + +E. cumberlandicum + +closest to Cumberland Falls include Eagle Creek, McCreary Co., +Kentucky +(UT 91.3177) and Bunches Creek, Whitely Co., +Kentucky +(UT 91.3122). In addition to the main stem of the Cumberland River, major tributary systems above the Cumberland Falls occupied by + +E. cumberlandicum + +include Marsh Creek, Jellico Creek, Clear Fork, Greasy Creek, Clear Creek, Yellow Creek, Brownies Creek, and Poor Fork of the Cumberland River ( +Fig. 1 +). Collections of + +E. cumberlandicum + +include locations in Bell, Harlan, Letcher, McCreary, and Whitely Counties, +Kentucky +and Campbell, Claiborne, and Scott Counties, +Tennessee +( +Fig. 1 +). + + + + +Table 11. Counts of caudal bands in + +Etheostoma cumberlandicum + +and + +E. kennicotti + +. Abbreviations: +n +, number of specimens; SD, standard deviation. Only specimens 44.0 mm and greather in standard length included. Data included from Page and Smith (1976: table 7). + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+Number of caudal bands +
+Species + +Drainage + +6 + +7 + +8 + +9 + +10 + +11 + +n + +Mean + +SD +
+ +Etheostoma cumberlandicum + +Upper Cumberland455391121117.570.79
+Etheostoma kennicotti +Laurel River1458189.110.96
Ohio–Clarks16232419.660.57
Green112158.601.40
Lower Tennessee141288.751.49
Upper Tennessee61592329.220.83
+ + + +Etymology.— +While not stated directly, it is clear the specific epithet + +Etheostoma cumberlandicum + +is in reference to the location of the species in the Cumberland River system ( +Jordan +and Swain, 1883). The common name Moonbow Darter is in reference to the rare ‘‘moonbow’’ associated with Cumberland Falls. On bright moonlit nights, mist rising from the water plunging over the waterfall refracts the moonlight producing an effect similar to a rainbow, but with less vivid colors. + + + + \ No newline at end of file